Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jGV5C-0007fN-Qy for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 21:58:06 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jGV5B-0001VN-Ma for pgsql-committers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 21:58:05 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jGV5B-0001VG-FH for pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 21:58:05 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jGV59-0004xk-1W; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 21:58:05 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 02NLw0dP003822; Mon, 23 Mar 2020 17:58:00 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Jeff Davis cc: Jeff Davis , pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: pgsql: Disk-based Hash Aggregation. In-reply-to: References: <23196.1584943506@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Jeff Davis message dated "Mon, 23 Mar 2020 14:49:29 -0700" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3819.1585000680.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 17:58:00 -0400 Message-ID: <3820.1585000680@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Jeff Davis writes: > On Mon, 2020-03-23 at 02:05 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> If there's no way to test the feature in some significantly-cheaper >> way, >> perhaps we should move this test out to a separate script that's not >> run >> by default. > I'll rework the tests. I wanted to be a bit more aggressive about > testing right after the checkin to shake out any problems, but I don't > think that's necessary any more. Fair enough. regards, tom lane